Views differ on IVF policy in York

I WISH to clarify comments made by readers in recent letters to The Press (“NHS should be fair and open to all”, August 15 , and “Couples need aid”, August 13).

Decisions regarding which NHS services are provided locally are made by the commissioners, and for York this is the Vale of York Clinical Commissioning Group. It is they who pay for local health services, and it is they who have to make the decision whether or not a service (for example IVF) is provided on the NHS for people in York.

Share article

It is not the decision of the hospital trust, as some readers have suggested. The hospital trust can only provide the services that it is paid to provide.

Promoted Stories

Comments (5)

Unfortunately this is a symptom (no pun intended) of the pseudo privatisation of the NHS which has been going on for some years. The original idea was that it should be free at the point of use to everybody and it should be NATIONAL. All hospitals should offer identical services and these should not be decided by mysterious "groups". In my opinion.

Unfortunately this is a symptom (no pun intended) of the pseudo privatisation of the NHS which has been going on for some years. The original idea was that it should be free at the point of use to everybody and it should be NATIONAL. All hospitals should offer identical services and these should not be decided by mysterious "groups". In my opinion.Pinza-C55

Unfortunately this is a symptom (no pun intended) of the pseudo privatisation of the NHS which has been going on for some years. The original idea was that it should be free at the point of use to everybody and it should be NATIONAL. All hospitals should offer identical services and these should not be decided by mysterious "groups". In my opinion.

Score: 3

roadwars says...6:08pm Tue 19 Aug 14

" It is they who pay for local health services, and it is they who have to make the decision whether or not a service (for example IVF) is provided on the NHS for people in York." It's us who pay for local health services and as we all pay the same rate wherever we live, we should all get the same service regardless of whether you think it should include IVF or not.

" It is they who pay for local health services, and it is they who have to make the decision whether or not a service (for example IVF) is provided on the NHS for people in York."
It's us who pay for local health services and as we all pay the same rate wherever we live, we should all get the same service regardless of whether you think it should include IVF or not.roadwars

" It is they who pay for local health services, and it is they who have to make the decision whether or not a service (for example IVF) is provided on the NHS for people in York." It's us who pay for local health services and as we all pay the same rate wherever we live, we should all get the same service regardless of whether you think it should include IVF or not.

Score: 8

Older Sometimes Wiser says...12:08pm Wed 20 Aug 14

As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved. It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving. The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function. Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias. Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do.

As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved.
It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving.
The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function.
Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias.
Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do.Older Sometimes Wiser

As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved. It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving. The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function. Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias. Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do.

Score: 0

Pinza-C55 says...2:14pm Wed 20 Aug 14

Older Sometimes Wiser wrote…

As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved. It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving. The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function. Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias. Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do.

"This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved." I which context are you using the word "democratically" ? The conventional meaning is a vote from the electorate. How can the public affect the decisions taken by the group and how are the group members chosen? What factors are allowed in the group's decisions?

[quote][p][bold]Older Sometimes Wiser[/bold] wrote:
As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved.
It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving.
The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function.
Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias.
Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do.[/p][/quote]"This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved."
I which context are you using the word "democratically" ? The conventional meaning is a vote from the electorate. How can the public affect the decisions taken by the group and how are the group members chosen? What factors are allowed in the group's decisions?Pinza-C55

Older Sometimes Wiser wrote…

As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved. It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving. The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function. Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias. Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do.

"This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved." I which context are you using the word "democratically" ? The conventional meaning is a vote from the electorate. How can the public affect the decisions taken by the group and how are the group members chosen? What factors are allowed in the group's decisions?

Score: 0

Older Sometimes Wiser says...6:40pm Wed 20 Aug 14

Pinza-C55 wrote…

Older Sometimes Wiser wrote…

As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved. It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving. The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function. Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias. Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do.

"This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved." I which context are you using the word "democratically" ? The conventional meaning is a vote from the electorate. How can the public affect the decisions taken by the group and how are the group members chosen? What factors are allowed in the group's decisions?

I will let Dr Mark Hayes respond should he wish to ,but essentially each member of the Board were asked for their views and a vote was taken. Differing views were expressed and a vote taken, which was close. There were a number of members of the public present, as the meetings are open with provision for initial questions. Again I suggest you attend in future.

[quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Older Sometimes Wiser[/bold] wrote:
As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved.
It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving.
The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function.
Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias.
Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do.[/p][/quote]"This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved."
I which context are you using the word "democratically" ? The conventional meaning is a vote from the electorate. How can the public affect the decisions taken by the group and how are the group members chosen? What factors are allowed in the group's decisions?[/p][/quote]I will let Dr Mark Hayes respond should he wish to ,but essentially each member of the Board were asked for their views and a vote was taken. Differing views were expressed and a vote taken, which was close.
There were a number of members of the public present, as the meetings are open with provision for initial questions.
Again I suggest you attend in future.Older Sometimes Wiser

Pinza-C55 wrote…

Older Sometimes Wiser wrote…

As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved. It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving. The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function. Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias. Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do.

"This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved." I which context are you using the word "democratically" ? The conventional meaning is a vote from the electorate. How can the public affect the decisions taken by the group and how are the group members chosen? What factors are allowed in the group's decisions?

I will let Dr Mark Hayes respond should he wish to ,but essentially each member of the Board were asked for their views and a vote was taken. Differing views were expressed and a vote taken, which was close. There were a number of members of the public present, as the meetings are open with provision for initial questions. Again I suggest you attend in future.

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standardards Organisations's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a compaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here